The difference is you refused to do something for everyone across the board. Nobody got those cake designs. But if you normally design a 3-tier wedding cake with a floral design, then you should be prepared to sell it to anyone who wants one, regardless of where they intend to use it.
 March 27, 2015 at 1:14pm
It is now legal in Indiana for a Muslim shop owner to refuse to serve a woman whose head is not covered, and if she is not accompanied by a male relative…. ANY Muslim shop owner… be it 7-11 or the gas station or anything.
You are correct, and it would be within our rights to not do business with that shop because of it. See how that works? All of these situations I have read about so far have had to deal with individually owned businesses who don't want to participate in a same sex marriage. They haven't refused to serve gays outright, they just don't want to be involved with same sex marriage ceremonies. Forcing someone to help with something they are uncomfortable (or are plainly against) just because you want it is ridiculous. There is always someone else willing to take your business.
Yes it is now legal for Muslim shop owners to do just that. And if no one wants to abide by their religious beliefs, there are hundreds of other shops where those requirements are not in place. See what I did there? Freedom. It's sad that I need to explain this to you.
There is a world of difference between requiring someone to be forced to do something he considers grossly morally offensive As opposed to refusing to give service Just Because of Who the people ideology, race, or sex is!
Good! And so what! What's your point!? Who gives a shit! We'd simply not go there anymore! Certainly not sue as there are plenty convenience stores, one or four on every corner!
 March 27, 2015 at 1:10pm
There’s a difference between demanding something the shop does not provide — like you bacon example in a Muslim store — and being turned away for something the shop does provide — a cake.
 March 27, 2015 at 1:01pm
So a Muslim owner of the 7-11 does not have to sell anything to a woman who is not accompanied by a male relative, nor has her head covered… because to do otherwise would be against his religious beliefs… in a 7-11.
He could not be an owner for long as he would go broke. Note the owner could not be a female becauae of the conditions you stipulated in your post. A true hardcore muslim would not sell alcohol, pork rines, or polish sausages just to name a few products. The business could not servive becauae it does not serve the target customer base. This figment of your imagination would be better off openning up Mohamads camel and food emporium which would appeal to his target customer base. Now if I were to enter his store I would not expect him to carry and sell me the previous mention items. I would accept that I am not part of his customer base and move on.
He's welcome to try that, but it's not going to work.
Unless you're making a reference to how stupid the Christians are being, because they want to do the same thing as the Muslims, just against gay people.
He has to abide by American Laws, which were based on Christian values. In his country, under his Muslim Laws, then yes, that's what we would have to do!
 March 26, 2015 at 6:37pm
So the state of Indiana can no longer prosecute a Muslim for murder when they commit an “honor” killing, as they are just practicing their faith.
You're both saying the same thing. He is speaking at a macro level and you are speaking at a micro level. We could even go another level higher and say man + woman = child.
March 19, 2015 at 12:10pm
First, she wasn’t raised in a lesbian home… she was raised in a broken home… the divorce came first in her life. As a young child THAT is what affected her, and why she wanted her father, even her bad father, back in her life. Parents need to put their children first. Now maybe her mother did, because the dad “wasn’t a great guy”… but the relationship between father and daughter had already existed… you can’t undo that. It sounds, to me, that her mother was too caught up in herself than her child.
After I divorced I made sure daddy/daughter time was just that. If I was dating someone, they stayed out of the time I had with my daughter. I was willing to let one into that time, but knowing that my daughter came first. None of them could handle that… they wanted any time about them, including time where my daughter was involved… sorry… not going to happen. I might still be single, but my relationship with my 20something daughter is great. NOW I can focus on a romantic relationship. When my daughter was growing up, my time was devoted to her. Too many people are not willing to sacrifice their own happiness for the sake of their children… THAT is where the problem is. And it honestly doesn’t matter if the person is gay or straight. I see it happen with both.
However I still believe a gay couple can raise children successfully… especially by having people of both genders in the child(ren)s life.
Kudos on your discipline and focus as well as your maturity. The world needs more adults like you. Yes, the issue is not that her mom is a lesbian but that she didn't have both parents in her life, which happens in both SSM and hetero. The difference is...in hetero marriage we start with the hope and assumption that both parents will be there. With SSM it is inherent that they won't. The only way around this is to have the bio-parent of the opposite sex involved in the life of the child, just like when a hetero couple divorces. Keep both parents involved. Then I guess it could work out okay.
 February 26, 2015 at 12:26pm
I don’t understand how the Spirit would be insulted by someone asking an honest question of someone more knowledgeable on the subject. Sounds like the same reasoning Muslims give when they go off when someone “insults” Mohammad… which is, of course, no reason at all.
 February 20, 2015 at 12:07am
She wasn’t “targeted”… they were long time customers, who regularly bought flowers in her shop. They went to buy flowers in their regular flower shop for a special occasion and were turned away because of what the special occasion was.
 February 9, 2015 at 2:01pm
I see Alabama is still following their long and proud tradition… seeing how they didn’t even bother to repeal their anti-miscegenation laws until 2000, when the US Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional in 1967.
You fruit bats are lucky God found me ... Ten years ago I would have just stuffed you idiots back n the closet...
[-2] February 2, 2015 at 1:32pm
They were willing to make the cake… just not include the wording. If the guy had actually quoted Scripture, I don’t think there would have been a problem… but he didn’t… even he admits that.
January 23, 2015 at 1:40pm
So you’re saying the retailer — in this case a baker — has the right to know what the consumer is doing with the product they are purchasing? AND if the retailer does not agree with how the product is to be used, has the right to refuse to sell?
January 22, 2015 at 4:31pm
Except for the fact that most wedding cakes do not have messages written on them. I’ve never been to a wedding where there was something written on the cake… most of them have floral or themed designs. But I’m sure there are people who do have things written on their wedding cakes.
January 22, 2015 at 4:26pm
Here’s the difference between the 2 cases. This baker never refused to bake a cake. The baker did refuse to add offending images or wording to the cake in question, but DID offer the supplies so the buyer could add their own images and wording to the cake. In the other case, the baker refused to bake a cake because of where the cake was going to be displayed/used/eaten… this baker never did that. That’s a huge difference.
There are slight differences but it still goes back to what the bakery owner believes they should be using their business for. In this case, this baker didn’t feel mean spirited, anti-gay words/sentiment should be created in her business. In the case of the christian bakers, they didn’t believe, because of their faith, that gay marriage was the right path and didn’t feel THAT should be created in their business. I still think it should be up to the store owner what they want to create/bake in their own store.
What ever happened to store owners having rights?? Lord knows they paid for the permits and licenses to open in the first place.
 December 17, 2014 at 11:20am
Oh please… I’m 6’6″… I have people all the time ask me to help them get things off top shelves… and not just at stores… sometimes at their own homes.
[-2] December 12, 2014 at 7:08pm
Stock photos or not… PFOX put up two different photos of the same guy, then put words next to those photos to indicate that they are twins. It’s deceitful, and they have been caught attempting to deceive the public.
 December 12, 2014 at 3:19pm
So a “christian” group uses false images to send message about their work…. isn’t that against one of the 10 commandments?? How can you trust anything they say if they so blatantly mislead people with false advertising?
The billboard does not say this individual it's an example STOCK photo _ I'm not saying it's right but the point their making is about TWIN RESEARCH not a particular individual - So don't be so quick to judge and group all people together that would be like me assuming all liberal are not too bright because of your silly post.
Yeah, much like the media claiming Obama was the Grand Uniter a few long years back. At least some of us got the real message behind what was being presented.
tmarends--- isn’t that against one of the 10 commandments??-----You do know the Ten commandments are there for ANYONE to read?.Hint,Hint.
Christians are like liberals in that they don't care if they have to lie or disregard facts if it means promoting their own ideas.
you're confusing the church, with Christians. two totally different things
June 20, 2013 at 5:46pm
These comments are interesting. I wonder how many people who are so against homosexuals are condemned by Christ’s own words by being remarried after a divorce for a reason other than death, abandonment, or infidelity?? (By the way, the person who abandons his/her spouse, or the one who was unfaithful, can not, Biblically, remarry.) Or how many have friends and/or family members in a sinful, according to the Bible, remarriage?? Do you also, with the same vim and vigor, also rebuke those sinful remarriages?? Both publicly and in their face?? Somehow I seriously doubt that you do.
To answer your question, I don't usually preach about sin because I'm not a preacher. But if anyone asked for my opinion, I would tell them.
More importantly, having had one marriage which was ended on grounds which were not Biblical, I now see that it is imperative for the rest of my life to live in celibacy -- which I am. Strictly.
Does that answer your question?
That still does not make homosexuality okay to do.
Personally i find that sad to hear. I think love is one of the greatest and most difficult values we can achieve in life. The idea that someone is locking themselves out of it because of a dogmatic religious belief seems unfortunate.
There is always Gods love so you have nothing to fear in regards to them lacking love.
January 12, 2013 at 6:28pm
Because of what? You’re quoting a verse that starts with “Because of this”… so I want to know because of what?? What happened PRIOR to those words that caused what happened AFTER?? Do you even know??
January 12, 2013 at 12:21pm
The problem with you statement is that abomination and sin are not interchangeable terms. Abomination, as used in the Bible, is a cultural taboo. For example, according to the book of Exodus, it was an abomination to the Egyptians if they were to share a meal with the Hebrews. However, it was NOT an abomination to the Hebrews. Every place abomination appears in the Bible it is a cultural thing, not a sin.